What is a '"Dump Expert"?

On 27/08/2020 14:58, Panthera Tigris wrote:
On 27/08/20 09:47, nospam wrote:
In article , Panthera Tigris
wrote:

Does anyone from Microsoft check such links to make sure they don't
lead
to a website containing a malicious payload?

Two things:

#1: You have "corrected" your 'discussion this please' point into
something
radically different.

This has been his pattern over a long time. He starts, or joins, a
thread, and then bends it into a radically different direction.

it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.


Not quite. No matter what the original topic was, or what newsgroup it
might be posted in, he often bends it towards malware and how he can
find it, using tools that he, frankly, cannot use properly. Some of the
time it is bent towards stalking those on his extremely lengthy enemies'
list. He has attempted to dox multiple posters. The, as he put it in the
subject line of one thread he started, 'Supernews Saga' was his attempt
to dox Wolffan and/or to get Supernews to close his account. It appears
that he was not successful in either endevour.

You can ask Wolffan about that AFTER the SWAT team have been to visit
his home.

He is not particularly intelligent.

Thank you! :-D

On 27/08/2020 21:20, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:09:53 +0100, David_B
wrote:

This fellow claims to be one!

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...ype=All&page=1

Please discuss

I see a lot of good-looking stuff at the dump but it's against their
rules to take it. And there's no one to pay. I'm sure I took
something once, but I can't remember what it was.



Hi Micky :-)

It's the same here in Devon where I live. I took my old Apple iMac there
earlier this year. Still looked smart amongst all the trash!
I did try very hard to repair it first! ;-)

What I want to highlight, though, are the links shown he-

https://ibb.co/fnLgT8Y

Does anyone from Microsoft check such links to make sure they don't lead
to a website containing a malicious payload?

I'll wager not!

Nobody would think twice about clicking on a link when they are under
the safety umbrella of the Microsoft Answers forum, now would they?
Gullible or what?!!!

I've read in the past that even just visiting a web page can cause
the infection of a Windows computer.

--
Kind regards,
David

On 27 Aug 2020, David_B wrote
(in article ):

On 27/08/2020 14:58, Panthera Tigris wrote:
On 27/08/20 09:47, nospam wrote:
In , Panthera Tigris
wrote:

Does anyone from Microsoft check such links to make sure they don't
lead
to a website containing a malicious payload?

Two things:

#1: You have "corrected" your 'discussion this please' point into
something
radically different.

This has been his pattern over a long time. He starts, or joins, a
thread, and then bends it into a radically different direction.

it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.

Not quite. No matter what the original topic was, or what newsgroup it
might be posted in, he often bends it towards malware and how he can
find it, using tools that he, frankly, cannot use properly. Some of the
time it is bent towards stalking those on his extremely lengthy enemies'
list. He has attempted to dox multiple posters. The, as he put it in the
subject line of one thread he started, 'Supernews Saga' was his attempt
to dox Wolffan and/or to get Supernews to close his account. It appears
that he was not successful in either endevour.

You can ask Wolffan about that AFTER the SWAT team have been to visit
his home.

So he just threatened to SWAT me. That would be a Federal, extraditable,
offense.


He is not particularly intelligent.

Thank you! :-D

you’re an idiot.

On 27 Aug 2020, David_B wrote
(in article ):

On 27/08/2020 22:13, nospam wrote:
In , R.Wieser
wrote:


it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.

And the answer to such a "could it" question is, and has always been, a
simple yes. Full stop. No "no" possible. Case closed. No need to
re-ask - or even ask to begin with.

Ofcourse, that all changes when someone asks for the /probability/ of such
a
thing. Something which can, and often does change per situation and
people involved. :-)

to him, everybody has evil intent, therefore the probability of malware
is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by microsoft,
apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

I don't know why you distort the truth.

ClamXav has *NOT* been checked and verified by Apple

Clam was deployed by Apple as part of their server bundle


he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added to
existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually has
been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I have *NEVER* claimed any such thing.

yes you have


he claims that any software developer who does not have a facebook
and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their software is malware
in disguise.

I'm sure many readers here will have noted that ClamXav *DOES* have a
Facebook page:- https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

no-one cares



366 people like this
397 people follow this

you just proved that no-one cares


there are numerous other examples, but those two are among the crazier
ones.

Do *YOU* recommend the use of ClamXav to protect an Apple computer?

you’re an idiot

In article , David_B
wrote:


it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.

And the answer to such a "could it" question is, and has always been, a
simple yes. Full stop. No "no" possible. Case closed. No need to
re-ask - or even ask to begin with.

Ofcourse, that all changes when someone asks for the /probability/ of such
a
thing. Something which can, and often does change per situation and
people involved. :-)

to him, everybody has evil intent, therefore the probability of malware
is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by microsoft,
apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

I don't know why you distort the truth.

no distortions. just the facts.

ClamXav has *NOT* been checked and verified by Apple

yes it has. you've even said so yourself.

but even if it had not been checked, there is no reason to suspect it's
malicious in any way.

he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added to
existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually has
been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I have *NEVER* claimed any such thing.

yes you did, many times.

he claims that any software developer who does not have a facebook
and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their software is malware
in disguise.

I'm sure many readers here will have noted that ClamXav *DOES* have a
Facebook page:- https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

366 people like this
397 people follow this

you've claimed that having so few likes means it's suspicious,
therefore it will install malware or otherwise cause problems.

there are numerous other examples, but those two are among the crazier
ones.

Do *YOU* recommend the use of ClamXav to protect an Apple computer?

nothing can protect it or windows pcs from the likes of you.

nospam,

is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by
microsoft, apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

To be honest, reading the different stories about how certain walled gardens
function I have much more confidence towards the utility (which I can pick
myself) than to the assurance of those companies. And thats apart of the
problem that such certifications can effectivily be bought ...

he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added
to existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually
has been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I'm rather pragmatic when meeting with "has been" stances like that :
substanciate / underbuild it or admit its just a probability you're
entertaining.

There is "how much effort do I need to protect myself against a determined
attacker" graph though, which shows that there is /no/ ammount of effort
that can stop an absolute determined attacker. Ofcourse, that graph
doesn't show the offending ammount of money needed to go upto that point -
which is most always the show-stopper.

(I always found the other side of that graph funny : people who, without
even realizing, broke a fair amount of "security")

In short : "Is it possible that ..." - we already went over that. Whats
the /probability/ of it ? Without having any proof or even signals about
it being thought about, let alone being technically possible* ? Slim to
none.

*The ammount of energy needed to punch a hole thru the silver layer of
standard CDROM will most likely cause enough heat to create bubbles in the
surrounding plastic, making it unreadable. The problem only gets bigger
when considering multi-layer DVDs.

he claims that any software developer who does not have a
facebook and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their
software is malware in disguise.

Lol. Than I must be suspicious to him too, as I got /no/ "social" media
stuff installed anywhere. Other than newsgroups ofcourse. :-) Rather
odd though, that he effectivily demands subscription to channels that he
must be aware of are are under the full control of known attackers and
privacy abusers.

Also, both Apple and Google/Alphabet have "walled gardens" that they
absolutily control, but have been proven to contain apps/software that are
poisoned with malware - even without the knowledge of the developpers
themselves.

Oh well.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 28/08/2020 03:37, Wolffan wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020, David_B wrote
(in article ):

On 27/08/2020 22:13, nospam wrote:
In , R.Wieser
wrote:


it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.

And the answer to such a "could it" question is, and has always been, a
simple yes. Full stop. No "no" possible. Case closed. No need to
re-ask - or even ask to begin with.

Of course, that all changes when someone asks for the /probability/ of such
a
thing. Something which can, and often does change per situation and
people involved. :-)

to him, everybody has evil intent, therefore the probability of malware
is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by microsoft,
apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

I don't know why you distort the truth.

ClamXav has *NOT* been checked and verified by Apple

Clam was deployed by Apple as part of their server bundle

Yes. *CLAM* was, but .....

*ClamXav is a separate product in its own right*!

As far as I can tell, nobody has reverse-engineered ClamXav to determine
whether or not anything untoward has been added to the basic Clam engine.

he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added to
existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually has
been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I have *NEVER* claimed any such thing.

yes you have

Cite

he claims that any software developer who does not have a facebook
and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their software is malware
in disguise.

I'm sure many readers here will have noted that ClamXav *DOES* have a
Facebook page:- https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

People SHOULD care about malpractice on the Internet

366 people like this
397 people follow this

*I* care!

there are numerous other examples, but those two are among the crazier
ones.

Do *YOU* recommend the use of ClamXav to protect an Apple computer?

you’re an idiot

Why have YOU never tested it to find out for yourself?

NO PAYMENT REQUIRED FOR 30 DAYS!

..

David_B wrote:


It's the same here in Devon where I live. I took my old Apple iMac there
earlier this year. Still looked smart amongst all the trash!
I did try very hard to repair it first! ;-)

We recycle those here.

The malware goes in one bin.

The computer goes in the other bin.

Paul

On 27/08/20 20:08, David_B wrote:
On 27/08/2020 14:58, Panthera Tigris wrote:
On 27/08/20 09:47, nospam wrote:
In article , Panthera Tigris
wrote:

Does anyone from Microsoft check such links to make sure they
don't lead
to a website containing a malicious payload?

Two things:

#1: You have "corrected" your 'discussion this please' point into
something
radically different.

This has been his pattern over a long time. He starts, or joins, a
thread, and then bends it into a radically different direction.

it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.


Not quite. No matter what the original topic was, or what newsgroup it
might be posted in, he often bends it towards malware and how he can
find it, using tools that he, frankly, cannot use properly. Some of
the time it is bent towards stalking those on his extremely lengthy
enemies' list. He has attempted to dox multiple posters. The, as he
put it in the subject line of one thread he started, 'Supernews Saga'
was his attempt to dox Wolffan and/or to get Supernews to close his
account. It appears that he was not successful in either endevour.

You can ask Wolffan about that AFTER the SWAT team have been to visit
his home.

It appears to me that you have failed to address the point. Let me be
blunt: I do not believe that Supernews told you anything of substance.
Doing so would be against their public policy, and doing so without
telling the subject first would be illegal under even the primitive
data-protection laws in the United States. It would expose them to legal
action from Wolffan, or, especially, his estate in the extremely
unlikely event that you did indeed lie to the police to send in a SWAT
team and something unfortunate happened. It would expose them to Federal
criminal charges; the FBI takes a very dim view of swatting.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr...ing-conspiracy

You of course, would be the primary defendant. Supernews would
undoubtedly open legal action against you, though they would probably
have to wait in line behind the FBI and it's attempts to have you
extradited to face charges of attempted capital murder, attempted
aggravated assault, conspiracy to commit capital murder, conspiracy to
commit aggravated assault, and anything else they could add. Recall that
in many states and at the Federal level it is not necessary that
everyone in a conspiracy know that they are part of a conspiracy.

This is where you post that you were 'having a bit of fun'.


He is not particularly intelligent.

Thank you! :-D


You consistently attempt to show just how unintelligent you are.

Please address the point: what did Supernews tell you?

On 28/08/20 07:29, David_B wrote:
On 28/08/2020 03:37, Wolffan wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020, David_B wrote
(in article ):

On 27/08/2020 22:13, nospam wrote:
In , R.Wieser
Â* wrote:


it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.

And the answer to such a "could it" question is, and has always
been, a
simple yes. Full stop. No "no" possible. Case closed. No need to
re-ask - or even ask to begin with.

Of course, that all changes when someone asks for the /probability/
of such
a
thing. Something which can, and often does change per situation and
people involved. :-)

to him, everybody has evil intent, therefore the probability of malware
is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by microsoft,
apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

I don't know why you distort the truth.

ClamXav has *NOT* been checked and verified by Apple

Clam was deployed by Apple as part of their server bundle

Yes. *CLAM* was, but .....

because it's a fact


*ClamXav is a separate product in its own right*!

you have never established that ClamXAV does anything other than what it
is supposed to do. You have never shown any trace of anything whatsoever
which might be malware of any type whatsoever which can be found in
ClamXAV, it's installer, or anything to do with it.


As far as I can tell, nobody has reverse-engineered ClamXav to determine
whether or not anything untoward has been added to the basic Clam engine.

The source code is available, so you would be wrong.


he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added to
existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually has
been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I have *NEVER* claimed any such thing.

yes you have

Cite

When you stated that you had detected malware on optical disc media.


he claims that any software developer who does not have a facebook
and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their software is malware
in disguise.

I'm sure many readers here will have noted that ClamXav *DOES* have a
Facebook page:- https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

People SHOULD care about malpractice on the Internet

Having a Facebook page is not relevant to 'malpractice on the Internet'.


366 people like this
397 people follow this

*I* care!

You are not important.


there are numerous other examples, but those two are among the crazier
ones.

Do *YOU* recommend the use of ClamXav to protect an Apple computer?

you’re an idiot

Why have YOU never tested it to find out for yourself?

Possibly because there is no reason to test for anything.


NO PAYMENT REQUIRED FOR 30 DAYS!

That is irrelevant.


.

On 28 Aug 2020, David_B wrote
(in article ):

On 28/08/2020 03:37, Wolffan wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020, David_B wrote
(in article ):

On 27/08/2020 22:13, nospam wrote:
In , R.Wieser
wrote:


it's always bent in the same direction: could it be hiding malware.

And the answer to such a "could it" question is, and has always been, a
simple yes. Full stop. No "no" possible. Case closed. No need to
re-ask - or even ask to begin with.

Of course, that all changes when someone asks for the /probability/ of
such
a
thing. Something which can, and often does change per situation and
people involved. :-)

to him, everybody has evil intent, therefore the probability of malware
is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by microsoft,
apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

I don't know why you distort the truth.

ClamXav has *NOT* been checked and verified by Apple

Clam was deployed by Apple as part of their server bundle

Yes. *CLAM* was, but .....

*ClamXav is a separate product in its own right*!

You’ve been told that ClamXAV is merely ClamAV wrapped up in. a
macOS-compatible wrapper.


As far as I can tell, nobody has reverse-engineered ClamXav to determine
whether or not anything untoward has been added to the basic Clam engine.

You’ve been told that the source code has been examined.


he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added to
existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually has
been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I have *NEVER* claimed any such thing.

yes you have

Cite

On numerous occasions. When called on it, you run away.


he claims that any software developer who does not have a facebook
and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their software is malware
in disguise.

I'm sure many readers here will have noted that ClamXav *DOES* have a
Facebook page:- https://www.facebook.com/clamxav

People SHOULD care about malpractice on the Internet

Having a FB page has nothing to do with malpractice on the internet or
anywhere else. And your opinion has no weight. What did Supernews tell you,
troll-boy? Where’s that SWAT team? Come on, arsenugget, put up or shut up.


366 people like this
397 people follow this

*I* care!

you’re nobody.


there are numerous other examples, but those two are among the crazier
ones.

Do *YOU* recommend the use of ClamXav to protect an Apple computer?

you’re an idiot

Why have YOU never tested it to find out for yourself?

Way back when I first encountered you, I stated that I had installed ClamXAV.
You ‘forgot’, eh? You really should cut back on your drinking.


NO PAYMENT REQUIRED FOR 30 DAYS!

Utterly irrelevant.

What did Supernews say, arsenugget?

On 28/08/2020 12:37, Paul wrote:
David_B wrote:


It's the same here in Devon where I live. I took my old Apple iMac
there earlier this year. Still looked smart amongst all the trash!
I did try very hard to repair it first! ;-)

We recycle those here.

The malware goes in one bin.

The computer goes in the other bin.

Â*Â* Paul

I just *LOVE* your sense of humour. Paul! :-D

On 28/08/2020 10:20, R.Wieser wrote:
nospam,

is 100%, even if the app has been verified to be clean by
microsoft, apple, google and/or an anti-malware utility.

To be honest, reading the different stories about how certain walled gardens
function I have much more confidence towards the utility (which I can pick
myself) than to the assurance of those companies. And thats apart of the
problem that such certifications can effectivily be bought ...

he has repeatedly claimed that malware can not only be added
to existing cd-rom discs long after their manufacture, but actually
has been. just to be clear, not writeable cd-r or cd-rw, but cd-rom.

I'm rather pragmatic when meeting with "has been" stances like that :
substanciate / underbuild it or admit its just a probability you're
entertaining.

There is "how much effort do I need to protect myself against a determined
attacker" graph though, which shows that there is /no/ ammount of effort
that can stop an absolute determined attacker. Ofcourse, that graph
doesn't show the offending ammount of money needed to go upto that point -
which is most always the show-stopper.

(I always found the other side of that graph funny : people who, without
even realizing, broke a fair amount of "security")

In short : "Is it possible that ..." - we already went over that. Whats
the /probability/ of it ? Without having any proof or even signals about
it being thought about, let alone being technically possible* ? Slim to
none.

*The ammount of energy needed to punch a hole thru the silver layer of
standard CDROM will most likely cause enough heat to create bubbles in the
surrounding plastic, making it unreadable. The problem only gets bigger
when considering multi-layer DVDs.

he claims that any software developer who does not have a
facebook and/or linkedin page is suspicious, therefore their
software is malware in disguise.

Lol. Than I must be suspicious to him too, as I got /no/ "social" media
stuff installed anywhere. Other than newsgroups ofcourse. :-) Rather
odd though, that he effectivily demands subscription to channels that he
must be aware of are are under the full control of known attackers and
privacy abusers.

Also, both Apple and Google/Alphabet have "walled gardens" that they
absolutily control, but have been proven to contain apps/software that are
poisoned with malware - even without the knowledge of the developpers
themselves.

Oh well.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


Rather than argue with you, Rudy, I'd like you to review the thread
where you may review the TRUTH of the matter:-

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...6-e565d2571849

I'll happily answer any questions you may have.

--
David B.

David,

Rather than argue with you, Rudy, I'd like you to review the thread where
you may review the TRUTH of the matter:-
[snip link]

Obliquely referring to a difference of opinions. Gotcha

Full parent-message inclusion instead of quoting the above(s). Gotcha

(Not actually mentioning the difference in opinions itself. Gotcha)

Removing yourself from being involved. Gotcha

Referring to some kind of "truth", but not mentioning what it might be.
Gotcha

Defining the outcome as fixed (bad move). Gotcha

Sending someone off to a wild goose chase to find the above, fully
unspecified, truth. Gotcha



Kiddo, you are /way/ to crude to be an effective troll.

Goodbye

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

P.s.
I see you have changed your nym again (email part this time). I know of a
few groups of people that do that regulary. Which one(es) of them do you
belong to ?

On 04 Sep 2020, R.Wieser wrote
(in article ):

David,

Rather than argue with you, Rudy, I'd like you to review the thread where
you may review the TRUTH of the matter:-
[snip link]

Obliquely referring to a difference of opinions. Gotcha

Full parent-message inclusion instead of quoting the above(s). Gotcha

(Not actually mentioning the difference in opinions itself. Gotcha)

Removing yourself from being involved. Gotcha

Referring to some kind of "truth", but not mentioning what it might be.
Gotcha

Defining the outcome as fixed (bad move). Gotcha

Sending someone off to a wild goose chase to find the above, fully
unspecified, truth. Gotcha

Kiddo, you are /way/ to crude to be an effective troll.

He tries. He’s just too stupid and drinks too much.


Goodbye

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

P.s.
I see you have changed your nym again (email part this time). I know of a
few groups of people that do that regulary. Which one(es) of them do you
belong to ?

He’s a troll and stalker.